Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 08:02:13 04/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 15, 2002 at 05:18:57, Thomas Lagershausen wrote: >In this understanding of chess every positional game is anti-computerchess and >it is only allowed to play tactical games.Chess is played before computers come >in the chessworld and so in a good traditional way things can´t be renamed only >because now computers are playing chess too. > >Computerpeople are making things often too simple.When i play a good positional >move it is a good positional move and not a anti-computermove. > >Thanks in advance for understanding this point. > >TL A good positional move is a good position move, agreed. Such moves may indeed be necessary to beat computers, but they are not usually SUFFICIENT. The human must ALSO avoid certain types of tactical positions where no human being (generally speaking) can compete successfully against strong computers. GMs have been playing strong positional moves for centuries. But knowing which types of positions to avoid against computers, and the techniques to steer the game accordingly, are the new skills that GMs have NOT shown in great quantities in the past few years. It is these new skills that (some) strong human chessplayers will probably improve in the next few years. Of course, one game is way too few to tell us if Smirin is or will be one of those humans. :-)
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.